My (limited) return to flashlight reviewing

[MrMom]

Welcome back from one old timer to another.

 

[InspectHerGadget]

Some of you out there may remember me.

From around 2008 until 2016, I used to post a lot of light reviews here. My main goal was always objective comparative testing of lights. This meant heavily standardized testing, with output, beam distance, beamshots and runtime measures for multiple comparable lights posted within the tables and charts of my individual reviews.

My reviews quickly became popular, and manufacturers soon began sending me their lights to review. By the time I wound down my review testing in 2016, I had reviewed nearly 600 flashlights.

So why did I stop, and why am I making a (limited) return?

The answer to the first part is a combination of life getting in the way, and waning interest.

As was likely obvious from my reviews, I have research background. As a successful professional in my own field, my work responsibilities continued to expand to the point where I had little free time left anymore - and couldn't handle the flood of requests I was getting.

I was also getting less satisfaction from my reviewing hobby. By ~2015, I had found the pace of innovation in flashlight design and performance had really slowed down. Through most of my time as a reviewer, overall LED emitter output was easily doubling every 12-18 months (Moore's law in action, I guess). And those early years saw huge explosions in innovative circuit designs - with increasingly efficient circuits and tons of specialty modes - plus huge experimentation in user interfaces (e.g., visually-linear ramping outputs, intuitive magnetic control rings, etc.). And improvements in beam patterns too - as a result of diverse designs and layouts in terms of emitters, reflectors, optics, etc. But by ~2015, it seemed like portable LED technology had pretty much fully matured, without the previous leaps in performance or design. An endless variety of me-too lights crossed my desk that didn't offer anything significant over what had come before.

Even worse, I was seeing increasingly the loss of useful features and designs, as manufacturers reverted to simpler and cheaper circuits (but with increasingly rakish physical designs, to distract you from the lack of substance). For example, formerly "hidden" modes were increasingly showing up in main sequences or too easily accessed (i.e., you could far too easily "tactically strobe" yourself now). The very useful "moonlight" modes for dark-adapted eyes were disappearing. And visually-linear ramps were turning into a joke with speeds so high that you could barely access a couple of discrete levels, etc.

Some of the other key drivers for my reviews had also diminished over time. I have always been singly focused on the truth when it comes to reviewing - by providing accurate, independent testing. While ANSI FL-1 standards were far from perfect, their widespread adoption at least helped to level the playing field in terms of reported specs - assuming makers were accurately representing their lights (which, while far from perfect, did improve over time and were fairly accurate by that point). Moreover, many other reviewers had joined the field, and started producing their own detailed reviews, so I felt the need for my own personal reviews had lessened somewhat - there were plenty of others out there to pick up the torch (pun intended).

That said, there were also a lot of reviewers who focused more on photography than rigorous comparative testing. Intentional or not, those glitzy reviews seemed to be serving more as free marketing tools for makers. I don't mean to cast shade on my fellow reviewers here - I believe the vast majority were simply focused on producing the highest quality reviews possible, and they had more photographic experience/skills than scientific. But the end result was a not-so-subtle shift of reviews being used are marketing tools, which I found frustrating.

So what brought me back?

I've lurked a little over the intervening years, to see what was new and emerging. A few innovations caught my eye, but nothing to really draw me back. In particular, emitter efficiency appears to have barely budged over the intervening years. Then I noticed how all the manufacturers had begun to produce 1x21700 lights.

I'll explain my interest in this battery format more on my new site (more about that in a moment). But the short version is that this small increase in size allows a lot more capacity to be stored in there. While that has obvious runtime advantages, the key point is what it means in terms of battery energy density - and thus how hard you can safely drive an emitter. Simply put, 21700 hits a sweet spot with standard ICR chemistry that can safely sustain higher discharge rates, allowing you drive an emitter much harder (at least for short periods of time).

Moreover, most major manufacturers are now bundling lights with branded 21700 batteries included. And these batteries often feature built-in charging capabilities through ubiquitous USB-C port connectors on the battery themselves, or through the lights. So, stand-alone battery chargers were no longer required, which is a real boon for getting these lights in the hands of non-flashaholics.

So, we now have the conditions to produce the ultimate holy grail of EDC flashlight technology - a reasonably compact light, with moonlight to multi-thousand lumen max output capabilities, all in an easily rechargeable fashion with no special gear required. One light that could serve as everything from your bedstand light, back pocket light, outdoor search light, or glovebox emergency light. Now that sounds interesting!

Looking at current reviews, I am glad to see a lot more detailed runtime testing being done out there now. There are many excellent reviewers and sites. But there is still relatively little in the way of direct comparative testing to other models of the same class in individual reviews.

So, I dusted off my old lightbox and ordered up a few compact 21700 models. I was able to recalibrate my lightbox for the higher output. I then reached out to some of my old manufacturer contacts, many of whom were interested in sending me some specimens to test and review. That testing is ongoing, and I will soon start posting my new reviews on my revamped personal website, flashlightreviews.ca (refreshed site to go live in a couple of days - old content is still up there right now).

So what will be different now?

My reviewing format will be revised somewhat, to both simplify my review production AND to provide you with more easily digestible comparative testing information. Detailed testing tables and charts will remain the focus. And the dedicated review website will provide a lot of new features and functionality - you will even be able to post your questions and comments right there on the actual review pages.

I will even make available my new complete database with testing results updated in near real-time while I am preparing the individual reviews (more details on that to follow on my website as well).

And I'm also going to start adding a feature I always eschewed - a rating system for lights. Given my main focus on the 21700 class right now, I think it's reasonable to finally start offering up an overall score, to allow you to quickly compare to other lights in that same class. If anything, my reviews are going to be even more tightly data-focused, with less extraneous material (sorry, no more YouTube video overviews – they were just too timing consuming for me to produce).

What's next after I work my way through the compact 1x21700 class lights? I don't know. I do plan to pick up additional lights here and there, in a curiosity-driven way. So expect to see the occasional higher-output thrower or flooder thrown in, maybe a headlamp or keychain light or two. We'll see.

I certainly won't be returning to the volume of lights I used to test, that wasn't sustainable and I still don't have the time. Let's take things one light at a time for now, and see where this goes.

Looking forward to being part of the community again!

Some of you out there may remember me.

From around 2008 until 2016, I used to post a lot of light reviews here. My main goal was always objective comparative testing of lights. This meant heavily standardized testing, with output, beam distance, beamshots and runtime measures for multiple comparable lights posted within the tables and charts of my individual reviews.

My reviews quickly became popular, and manufacturers soon began sending me their lights to review. By the time I wound down my review testing in 2016, I had reviewed nearly 600 flashlights.

So why did I stop, and why am I making a (limited) return?

The answer to the first part is a combination of life getting in the way, and waning interest.

As was likely obvious from my reviews, I have research background. As a successful professional in my own field, my work responsibilities continued to expand to the point where I had little free time left anymore - and couldn't handle the flood of requests I was getting.

I was also getting less satisfaction from my reviewing hobby. By ~2015, I had found the pace of innovation in flashlight design and performance had really slowed down. Through most of my time as a reviewer, overall LED emitter output was easily doubling every 12-18 months (Moore's law in action, I guess). And those early years saw huge explosions in innovative circuit designs - with increasingly efficient circuits and tons of specialty modes - plus huge experimentation in user interfaces (e.g., visually-linear ramping outputs, intuitive magnetic control rings, etc.). And improvements in beam patterns too - as a result of diverse designs and layouts in terms of emitters, reflectors, optics, etc. But by ~2015, it seemed like portable LED technology had pretty much fully matured, without the previous leaps in performance or design. An endless variety of me-too lights crossed my desk that didn't offer anything significant over what had come before.

Even worse, I was seeing increasingly the loss of useful features and designs, as manufacturers reverted to simpler and cheaper circuits (but with increasingly rakish physical designs, to distract you from the lack of substance). For example, formerly "hidden" modes were increasingly showing up in main sequences or too easily accessed (i.e., you could far too easily "tactically strobe" yourself now). The very useful "moonlight" modes for dark-adapted eyes were disappearing. And visually-linear ramps were turning into a joke with speeds so high that you could barely access a couple of discrete levels, etc.

Some of the other key drivers for my reviews had also diminished over time. I have always been singly focused on the truth when it comes to reviewing - by providing accurate, independent testing. While ANSI FL-1 standards were far from perfect, their widespread adoption at least helped to level the playing field in terms of reported specs - assuming makers were accurately representing their lights (which, while far from perfect, did improve over time and were fairly accurate by that point). Moreover, many other reviewers had joined the field, and started producing their own detailed reviews, so I felt the need for my own personal reviews had lessened somewhat - there were plenty of others out there to pick up the torch (pun intended).

That said, there were also a lot of reviewers who focused more on photography than rigorous comparative testing. Intentional or not, those glitzy reviews seemed to be serving more as free marketing tools for makers. I don't mean to cast shade on my fellow reviewers here - I believe the vast majority were simply focused on producing the highest quality reviews possible, and they had more photographic experience/skills than scientific. But the end result was a not-so-subtle shift of reviews being used are marketing tools, which I found frustrating.

So what brought me back?

I've lurked a little over the intervening years, to see what was new and emerging. A few innovations caught my eye, but nothing to really draw me back. In particular, emitter efficiency appears to have barely budged over the intervening years. Then I noticed how all the manufacturers had begun to produce 1x21700 lights.

I'll explain my interest in this battery format more on my new site (more about that in a moment). But the short version is that this small increase in size allows a lot more capacity to be stored in there. While that has obvious runtime advantages, the key point is what it means in terms of battery energy density - and thus how hard you can safely drive an emitter. Simply put, 21700 hits a sweet spot with standard ICR chemistry that can safely sustain higher discharge rates, allowing you drive an emitter much harder (at least for short periods of time).

Moreover, most major manufacturers are now bundling lights with branded 21700 batteries included. And these batteries often feature built-in charging capabilities through ubiquitous USB-C port connectors on the battery themselves, or through the lights. So, stand-alone battery chargers were no longer required, which is a real boon for getting these lights in the hands of non-flashaholics.

So, we now have the conditions to produce the ultimate holy grail of EDC flashlight technology - a reasonably compact light, with moonlight to multi-thousand lumen max output capabilities, all in an easily rechargeable fashion with no special gear required. One light that could serve as everything from your bedstand light, back pocket light, outdoor search light, or glovebox emergency light. Now that sounds interesting!

Looking at current reviews, I am glad to see a lot more detailed runtime testing being done out there now. There are many excellent reviewers and sites. But there is still relatively little in the way of direct comparative testing to other models of the same class in individual reviews.

So, I dusted off my old lightbox and ordered up a few compact 21700 models. I was able to recalibrate my lightbox for the higher output. I then reached out to some of my old manufacturer contacts, many of whom were interested in sending me some specimens to test and review. That testing is ongoing, and I will soon start posting my new reviews on my revamped personal website, flashlightreviews.ca (refreshed site to go live in a couple of days - old content is still up there right now).

So what will be different now?

My reviewing format will be revised somewhat, to both simplify my review production AND to provide you with more easily digestible comparative testing information. Detailed testing tables and charts will remain the focus. And the dedicated review website will provide a lot of new features and functionality - you will even be able to post your questions and comments right there on the actual review pages.

I will even make available my new complete database with testing results updated in near real-time while I am preparing the individual reviews (more details on that to follow on my website as well).

And I'm also going to start adding a feature I always eschewed - a rating system for lights. Given my main focus on the 21700 class right now, I think it's reasonable to finally start offering up an overall score, to allow you to quickly compare to other lights in that same class. If anything, my reviews are going to be even more tightly data-focused, with less extraneous material (sorry, no more YouTube video overviews – they were just too timing consuming for me to produce).

What's next after I work my way through the compact 1x21700 class lights? I don't know. I do plan to pick up additional lights here and there, in a curiosity-driven way. So expect to see the occasional higher-output thrower or flooder thrown in, maybe a headlamp or keychain light or two. We'll see.

I certainly won't be returning to the volume of lights I used to test, that wasn't sustainable and I still don't have the time. Let's take things one light at a time for now, and see where this goes.

Looking forward to being part of the community again!

Welcome back. I too have not been on the forum for the reasons you mentioned. The technology has reached a plateau and that is a good thing really. It means manufacturers and engineers can think about ways to increase the value to the end user including people who take this technology seriously. I also ended up with enough lights that I was starting to own lights with the same function and I am really a user, not a collector.

I love Ledlenser by the way, at least for headlamp, the H14R.2 I just sold after ten years of use and now I have the H15R which has two 21700 batteries. I love the focussing lens even if the beam pattern is, shall we say, a bit fluffy! I like practical lights I can use.

I also have other lights from Fenix BC30R...handlebar mounted and then the TN32 for beam distance but my favourite was my Zebralight which can be sold only to U.S. customers which I found weird, now having lost it. I just use a TN12 even though it isn't as good, it has a beltpouch so it doesn't fall into the weeds like the last two Zebralights did. I also have an Eagletac MX25L3. I have other more minor lights too...the point is most of them were probably bought with the help of your reviews. No one likes Ledlenser though (it seems) so I'm sure I bought it for other reasons.

I think of all the lights, the Ledlenser headlamp the H15R is going full steam ahead with the 2 x 21700 batteries and I have gone out on long night walks now maybe six times and it is great having a light that even with one of four green charge bars showing will give 45 minutes or more of light at 1000 Lumens continuous no issues at all. I also have my eye on a Fenix with one 21700 battery in it.

I will be reading your reviews!

 

[bladesmith3]

welcome back. i have always enjoyed your informative reviews. thanks in advance for your hard work. 👍

 

[fordcappy]

Welcome back sir!!!

 

[selfbuilt]

Welcome back from one old timer to another.

We old timers need to stick together.

Welcome back. I too have not been on the forum for the reasons you mentioned. The technology has reached a plateau and that is a good thing really. It means manufacturers and engineers can think about ways to increase the value to the end user including people who take this technology seriously. I also ended up with enough lights that I was starting to own lights with the same function and I am really a user, not a collector.

...the point is most of them were probably bought with the help of your reviews. No one likes Ledlenser though (it seems) so I'm sure I bought it for other reasons.

Yes, as a colleague of mine once said about my two reviewing hobbies, he found the ongoing whisky reviews incredibly helpful - but you know, he already owned a flashlight, so .... 😉

I never did get around to reviewing a LedLenser. I know there is a subset here who really like them, but I always found the beam patterns weird, and never got around to picking one up. Too busy with invited reviews too.

welcome back. i have always enjoyed your informative reviews. thanks in advance for your hard work. 👍

My pleasure.

Welcome back sir!!!

Good to see you again too.

 

[importculture]

Damn! Welcome back! I used to read your reviews here and watch your reviews on youtube! Welcome back hopefully we'll see your reviews on youtube as well!

 

[selfbuilt]

Damn! Welcome back! I used to read your reviews here and watch your reviews on youtube! Welcome back hopefully we'll see your reviews on youtube as well!

Thanks. No plans to restart the videos I'm afraid, I'm going to stick with the tables and charts mainly.

 

[Enzo]

Wow! I watched all of your reviews. Glad you're back!

 

[selfbuilt]

Wow! I watched all of your reviews. Glad you're back!

Thanks.

I'm surprised to hear how much love there is for the videos, given I never got much feedback on those back in the day. I suppose video is a much more popular medium now than before.

 

[divine]

Good luck!

 

[kreisl]

Sorry to say i haven't read any of your 2023 reviews and i am also not going to. Mostly because i lost interest in new lights new brands, same as you like ~8yr ago, other than the lights which i have and use myself haha, and also because none of the reviewed brands and lights (nor the 21700 battery format) are any relevant to me: ACEBEAM, ARMYTEK, CONVOY, EMISAR, ETC, FITORCH, FIREFLIES, KRESILITE, MATEMINCO, MAXTOCH, NOCTIGON, ROVYVON, SKILHUNT, SOFIRN, WUBEN, WURKKOS, i feel 100% indifferent to whatever they release, in the past, present, future.

Am glad that not everybody is like me and that you enyoj investing your time and energy in producing extensive detailistic reviews of lights from such brands! I must admire such commitment, i simply caht get it up for them 🍆. You keep it up, hopefully the reviews will find maany readers. It's their view numbers and lively feedback which keeps the review threads alive and ultimately your motivation ongoing , cheers!

Btw occasionally, without being asked, out of the blue, i still post about products which i bought and use and love —it's called sharing— , i share how i take care of them (reversible mods, etc), how much i appreciate them (over other competitive products), or whenever i discovered something interesting while using them. Like myself, I wished reviewers would share more from their personal use of the products over time.

I'd read that.

 

[letschat7]

I consider all "reviews" as marketing tools nowadays, unless they are made by end users who have no financial stake in any of it.

My reviews are mostly on my own dime. I've been given like 8 AAA cells and a worthless Rayovac from a friend or some Manufacturer. Still I pick the lights out, purchase them, and review them. I wish I had more scientific gear and the ability to use them.

A bulk of my lights are from the 20th century and probably not even being produced with the exception of Mags, a lot are pending reviews too.

 

[letschat7]

WUBEN....... i feel 100% indifferent to whatever they release, in the past, present, future.

 

[letschat7]

What about Reylight which they are sometimes the OEM for?

 

[325addict]

I've had the same... fading interest in lights, now 99.9% are LED-lights with unbearable light color. I still stick with incans, and nearly nothing is still available for these. I stay AWAY from 21700 cells with built-in USB-C port. What's the use for it, when I have multiple GOOD chargers around? And to call a one 21700 an EDC light... WAY too large and heavy for me. Maximum is a one 16340 or single AAA light for me as an EDC. At this moment, such a single 10180 mini-light made of copper from Lumintop is my EDC ;-)
DM51 had an excellent thread on the M6 with several rechargeable options back in the years. GLAD I then bought a lot of bulb options and 2-cell and 3-cell li-ion holders for the M6. I still enjoy these, together with the E1E with Lumens Factory 3.6V / 50 Lumen bulb for a rechargeable 16340. Once in a while, that's my EDC. At work, my good old trusted C3 Centurion with P90 lamp assembly and 2X 17500 li-ions is used on a near-daily basis. It ate itself through several sets of 17500s and fell countless times to the concrete floor, the tailcap has dents all over in it, the head isn't even round anymore and.... it is STILL on it very first P90! I wouldn't know WHAT it takes to kill such a lamp ;-)
20700s and 21700s are very useful... to fire up my old, until recently unusable "2R10" duplex 3V battery lights. I have quite a lot of these, they are handy and compact and have the right amount of light output for close-up work. In some, a 21700 just doesn't fit right, then I take a 20700... just don't forget to change the bulb from the 2.2V / 0.25A to the 3.7V / 0.3A Daimon "NF Brillant" bulb of which I still have enough.

 

[kreisl]

What about Reylight which they are sometimes the OEM for?

REYLIGHT? For me, that's the same story as KRESILITE 's all i am gonna say. btw i never got my hands on them, so i shouldn't speak 😷

 

[selfbuilt]

Am glad that not everybody is like me and that you enyoj investing your time and energy in producing extensive detailistic reviews of lights from such brands!

I am enjoying going through these new lights so far, to see what has changed from the old days.

There have clearly been some changes in circuit designs, both positive and negative. Similarly, battery chemistry/performance is different from the old ICR chemistry. And the built-in chargers have some distinctive quirks, etc.

For now, it is fun to go through the detailed testing see what is different. But I also understand why interests wanes - at the end of the day, these are functional tools, and what works is what matters.

 

[Chauncey Gardener]

A lot of selfbuilt's 4Sevens & Foursevens reviews can be located here - #1

 

[letschat7]

REYLIGHT? For me, that's the same story as KRESILITE 's all i am gonna say. btw i never got my hands on them, so i shouldn't speak 😷

Don't miss out. They are one of the best China lights. Normally I dislike Chinese stuff but this is something amazing. One light I got not because it was exactly what I want but just to see what was important features to the Chinese and it was made from a material exclusively found in their country.

 

[AstroTurf]

Don't miss out. They are one of the best China lights. Normally I dislike Chinese stuff but this is something amazing. One light I got not because it was exactly what I want but just to see what was important features to the Chinese and it was made from a material exclusively found in their country.

exclusive to china material?!?

chinesium...